2024 PLP (C (PLC(CS))

ALI BAIG, CJ.

Through the instant writ petition filed under Article 86(2) of the Government of Gilgit-Baltistan Order, 2018, the petitioner has prayed that she, being contingent paid teacher in Education Department District Ghizer, is entitled for bio-metric verification and the answering respondents may be directed to conduct her biometric verification accordingly.

2. The respondents contested this writ petition by way of filing their para-wise comments, wherein they have raised certain legal and factual objections inter alia that the writ petition of the petitioner is hopelessly time barred as the respondents have completed bio-metric verification process of all contingent paid employees of Education Department Gilgit-Baltistan in the year 2017-18 by providing subsequent/additional opportunities to the contingent paid employees.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner argue that the respondents have conducted bio-metric verification of the colleagues of the present petitioner hence the petitioner is also entitled for bio-metric verification. The learned counsel for the petitioner further argued that the petitioner is serving a contingent paid teacher in Education Department District Ghizer since the year 2015 and the respondents have not conducted bio-metric verification of the petitioner as such the respondents have committed discrimination with the petitioner. The learned courts for the petitioner further argued that the petitioner is still performing her duties as contingent paid teacher in Girls Middle School Gupis and the competent authorities of Education Department Gilgit-Baltistan have also recommended the petitioner for bio-metric verification, hence the petitioner is entitled for bio-metric verification.

4. Conversely, the learned Dy. Advocate General assisted by Legal Advisor controverted the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner by contending that the Education Department Gilgit-Baltistan has completed bio-metric verification process of all contingent paid employees throughout Gilgit-Baltistan in the year 2017-18, hence the petitioner has not availed the opportunity of bio-metric verification within time. The learned Dy. Advocate General and L.A further contended that the petitioner has filed this writ petition after lapse of almost 5 years from the date of completion of bio-metric verification process, hence the writ petition of the petitioner is clearly time barred. The learned Dy. Advocate General and L.A further contended that the petitioner is a community teacher who has been engaged temporarily on local fund, as such she does not fall within the ambit of contingent paid staff. The learned Dy. Advocate General and L.A further contended that the petitioner has failed to meet the criteria of bio-metric verification during bio-metric verification process and she was also informed accordingly, hence the petitioner has no cause of action to file this writ petition. The learned Dy. Advocate General and L.A further contended that the bio-metric verification process is a past and closed transaction and the bio-metric verification of the petitioner at this stage will severely cause complications for the government to initiate policy for regularization of all contingent paid employees of Gilgit-Baltistan, hence the writ petition of the petitioner is not maintainable and the same is liable to be dismissed in the interest of justice.

5. We have heard the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the respective parties and perused the available record with their able assistance.

6. The learned DAG and L.A for Education Department mainly contended that the petitioner was not appointed as contingent paid employee rather she was appointed as community school teacher, therefore, she is not entitled for bio-metric verification, but the respondents have miserably failed to produce any appointment order or document regarding appointment of the petitioner as community school teacher. From perusal of record it transpires that the present petitioner and eight (08) other individuals/persons were appointed as contingent paid staff vide office order No.DDE(GZ)-43(2)/2015 dated 28th October 2015. The aforesaid office order has belied the version/averment of the respondents that the petitioner is community school teacher and she does not fall within the ambit of contingent paid staff. The respondents have conducted bio-metric verification of the colleagues of the present petitioner, but the respondents have not provided a fair opportunity to the petitioner for bio-metric verification as evident from the record.

7. Moreover, vide letter dated 19th June, 2020 addressed to the Secretary Education, the Director Schools Co-ordination Gilgit-Baltistan has recommended the petitioner for bio-metric verification which was forwarded to the Secretary Finance GB by the Secretary Education, vide letter dated 9th December 2020, but the respondent No.3 has failed to do the needful. This is clear discrimination on the part of respondents against the petitioner.

8. For the foregoing reasons, this writ petition is allowed and the respondents are directed to provide opportunity to the petitioner for bio-metric verification within shortest possible lime.

9. This writ petition is disposed of accordingly. MQ/16/GB Petition allowed.